Section 1008.33, Florida Statutes, provides the State Board of Education with the authority to enforce public school improvement through a statewide system of supports and intervention, and authorizes Rule 6A-1.099811, Florida Administrative Code, which establishes differentiated intervention and
support strategies for traditional public schools, delineates the
responsibilities of the school, district, and Department of Education, sets timelines for intervention and support strategies,
prescribes reporting requirements to review and monitor progress of schools,
and sets forth submission and approval criteria for turnaround
implementation plans.

No, charter schools are exempt from this statute, pursuant to section 1002.33(16), Florida Statutes. If a charter has a current grade of D or F, they must follow the accountability requirements of Rule 6A-1.099827, Florida Administrative Code.

Yes. A district may request to
modify the requirements of the plan, and the State Board of Education has the
discretion to approve the request. Form TOP-2 is incorporated in Rule
6A-1.099811, F.A.C. As part of the instructions, this form provides as
follows:

“Modification of the Common and
Option-Specific Requirements of this form may be approved based upon the
following:

1.
The request is made on this form.

2.
The request includes evidence that the modification
will not impede school improvement.

3.
The request includes evidence that the modification is
not contrary to statutory requirement.”

Pursuant to Rule
6A-1.099811, F.A.C., the following timeline provides dates of deliverables required in 2017 for districts with schools identified on the 2016-17 DA Support List with a Turnaround Status of Planning (Year 1) or Implementing (Year 2 and 3 only).

May 1, 2017: Submit TOP Phase 1 to bsi@fldoe.org.Districts must work with their regional executive director (RED) to review the needs assessment and turnaround options prior to submitting Phase 1.

June 5-14, 2017: Complete survey to provide baseline data for subsequent progress monitoring data reviews. More details will be emailed to district contacts in mid-May.

Two weeks after 2017 school grades are posted or by July 31, 2017, whichever comes first: Submit TOP Phase 2 to bsi@fldoe.org on behalf of all schools included in Phase 1 that do not improve the school grade in 2017. Note: A TOP Companion Guide is available to support this process. Districts must work with their RED on the development of Phase 2 prior to its final submission.

The above dates and deliverables are subject to change based upon the timing of the 2017 school grades release and requests by the State Board of Education. District contacts will be notified of any changes.

No. The District Improvement and Assistance Plan (DIAP) is only required of districts with Targeted or Comprehensive Support and Intervention schools schools. However, all districts are welcome to complete it if they choose.

Each state must develop a nomination plan annually that includes, at a minimum, the eligibility criteria outlined by the U.S. Department of Education (USED), which can be
found at http://www2.ed.gov/programs/nclbbrs/eligibility.html.
Additional USED-established criteria can be found in the front matter of the application itself. Schools are nominated by the Florida Department of Education based on the criteria
outlined in the USED-approved nomination plan.

Florida can nominate up to 13 schools each year; although, due to the strict criteria, fewer than 13 schools may be eligible. At least one
third of the nominated schools must have at least 40 percent of their students from disadvantaged backgrounds.

The Florida Department of Education (FDOE) nominates eligible schools in the winter and then nominated schools receive a formal invitation from the U.S. Department of Education (USED) to apply for the award. The
application deadline is in the spring. After a rigorous application review process by USED and certification by the FDOE, award recipients are announced in
the fall by the Secretary of Education. The detailed timeline, which varies slightly each year, can be found at http://www2.ed.gov/programs/nclbbrs/applicant.html.

Yes, the Council for American Private Education (CAPE) nominates schools that meet the criteria for recognition. Non-public schools
interested in being nominated should contact CAPE directly at brs@capenet.org; additional information can
be found at www.capenet.org/brs.html.

The District Problem Solving module is a shared repository of strategic goals for the district, which can be used in
fulfillment of the DIAP, TIPA, and/or SIG. For this reason, it is possible that multiple district users could be working within District Problem Solving at the same time. To avoid accidentally overwriting someone else's work, district beta testers requested an added layer of security. District Problem Solving now defaults to Read-Only mode when navigating. When you are ready to enter information, simply click the red Edit Mode Off button so that it turns gray and reads Edit Mode On.

This icon is called a Quick Key and each is unique to a field in the Problem Solving module. Registered users can use the Quick Key to go directly to the point of entry for any given goal, barrier, strategy, action step, or monitoring activity within the Problem Solving module. Simply enter the key in the search field at the top-right corner of any page in Problem Solving. Each Quick Key begins with a letter, which provides a clue regarding the field it represents; for example, if the key begins with a "M," then that key is connected to a monitoring activity (captured in Step 6, 7, or 8).

The Quick Key is most useful when referencing a printed export of a SIP or DIAP and trying to locate its content in CIMS. Although the numbering in a source code (e.g., G1.B2.S1) may change over time as items are added, removed, or reordered, the Quick Key will remain the same.

The "Unearned Points by Student" chart represents lost opportunity in statewide assessments and helps us identify the greatest opportunity for improvement among the school grading formula cells. The taller the bar, the greater the number of points “left on the table” per student in a denominator of the school grade.

Each vertical bar represents a ratio. The numerator is the number of points unearned (out of 100 possible points) for a given grading formula cell (e.g., reading proficiency, math learning gains, etc.), while the denominator is the number of students in the cohort tested for a cell. The chart is intended to inform allocation of resources and strategic goal choices in those situations where resources are scarce.

Schools that receive a school improvement rating or did not receive a school grade in prior years (e.g., schools that only serve students in non-tested grade levels and new schools) are not included in the Step Zero data visualizations. For the time being, Step Zero is only populated with data from the School Grades file.

Schools with no data appearing in Step Zero should use data available at the local level to engage in problem identification. The resources available for problem analysis and goal formulation, especially the CIMS Offline Worksheet - Step Zero, will still be useful and can be found in the Problem Solving Toolkit.

A district user has access to school grades data in Step Zero for all schools in the district that receive a school grade. Therefore, regardless of how a district user accesses the Step Zero module, they will always find the full list of schools in the district that fit within the parameters established by the teal filters at the top of the Academic Outcomes page.

The Department does not require a specific number of or
emphasis for targets. Rather, districts and schools are encouraged to review
available state and local data through a needs assessment (problem
identification and root cause analysis), consider each of the five domains that research
demonstrates are conditions necessary for successful schools (Effective
Leadership, Ambitious Instruction, Collaborative Teaching, Safe/Supportive
Environment, and Family/Community Engagement), and focus on the highest
priority areas of strength and weakness for the school or district.

The exhaustive list of indicators in CIMS allows teams to set
targets that are relevant to the strategic goals they have identified in Step
1a as a result of the needs assessment. Keep in mind that Step 1a and Step 1b
together create a theory of action – that is, by realizing the strategic
goal (1a), the set targets would also be reached (1b). Thus, the purpose for
setting targets in problem solving is not to predict results but rather to
ensure the team is considering from the beginning the
conditions for success and examining results objectively to determine if
strategies are working, with systematic and urgent focus on how students are
learning.

In the target-setting portion of Problem Solving (Step 1b), the
Florida Standards Assessment indicators include the option to set targets in
terms of “percent” or “percentile.” Within the Academic Outcomes
Plot in Step Zero, teams will find a "bubble chart" that displays
percentile rankings information for the school, including a comparison of the
school’s overall performance in each of the eight standard school grading cells
in 2012-13 and 2013-14 (y-axis), and the year-over-year change in performance
for the same cells and academic years (x-axis). Percentile rankings allow us to
understand the school's position relative to all other schools of the same type
in the state, regardless of the statewide assessment being used. The school can
view its trajectory in terms of percentile rankings and then apply that
trajectory to the 2014-15 and 2015-16 school years for the purpose of setting
targets for the Florida Standards Assessment.

For example, if a school was in the 23rd percentile for FCAT 2.0
reading proficiency in 2013 and the 26th percentile for FCAT 2.0 reading
proficiency in 2014, progress monitoring data over the 14-15 school year showed
promising results in reading and writing, and the team has committed to
improving its implementation of strategies designed to develop literacy, the
school might logically project its percentile ranking for FSA Reading to
increase in 15-16, even before knowing the proficiency results for 2015.

There is no formula for setting targets; rather, the leadership
team makes a projection according to its situational awareness and access to
and understanding of reliable early warning and progress monitoring data. For
additional support with this process, please view the Problem
Solving Toolkit.

The main school improvement contact for each district is able to manage the list of indicators that will appear in their district's school improvement plans by going to the Districts page, clicking on their respective district name from the list of districts, clicking the black Manage Information button at the top-right corner, and then clicking the Manage Targets tab. This tab will display a list of all indicators currently available in CIMS, each with its own check box. If a check mark appears in the box, then that indicator will be included in the list that appears in the school improvement plans for the district; to hide an indicator from that list, simply click the box so a check mark no longer appears.

If you are not the main contact and wish for an indicator to be added, please email your main contact with the request. On the Plan Dashboard for any survey, this person is listed as General under District Contacts. If the indicator is not already available in CIMS, the main contact may request it by submitting an Intercom message or emailing bsi@fldoe.org with the description of the indicator(s) being requested, including any definitions or calculations.

No, the Florida Standards Assessment (FSA) English Language Arts and Mathematics targets are not the
same as AMO targets. FSA targets are for the new Florida Standards Assessments in English language arts and mathematics and are stand-alone indicators; AMO targets are a combination of FCAT 2.0 and FAA proficiency scores for reading and FCAT 2.0, FAA, and EOC assessment proficiency scores for mathematics.

FSA proficiency targets cannot yet be calculated in terms of percent,
but they can be set in terms of percentile.
For more information, please reference the Step Zero Quick Guide - Percentile Ranking in the Toolkit and utilize Step Zero in CIMS.

Although the Florida Standards Assessment (FSA) in English language arts will include a writing component, only one score will be provided; there will not be a separate writing component score. As such, we have not included writing as a separate indicator in CIMS.

While you cannot set an FSA target for writing alone in Step 1b, you can certainly address writing as part of a strategic goal. In Steps 4 and 5, writing-specific strategies and action steps can be added, along with accompanying monitoring activities in Steps 6 and 7.

The denominator of the middle school acceleration
performance measure is the unduplicated count of students from the numerator of
the participation component who have a valid score. Students are included in
the numerator for performance if they score at Achievement Level 3 or higher on
an EOC assessment or have a passing industry certification outcome. For
students with more than one successful outcome, an additional 0.1 points are
credited to the student for each successful outcome beyond the first, which is
weighted at 1.0 points. As with the acceleration performance component for high
school grades, middle schools can earn additional successful completions for
students who achieve industry certifications that result in credit for more
than one college course through Statewide Articulation
Agreements.

If graduation rate is a priority concern for the school,
and a strategic goal has been developed that will improve the graduation rate, then
it is appropriate that one or more of the graduation rate indicators be selected as targets for that strategic goal.

The number of on-time graduates
is the count of students who earn diplomas within four years of the first time they entered grade 9. GED diploma recipients in high school exit option
programs, as well as special diploma recipients, are not counted as graduates.
However, students in the cohort who received a standard high school diploma
through an adult education program are counted as graduates.

There is an indicator in Step
1b of Problem Solving for four year and five
year graduation rates. The five-year graduation rate is a follow-up to the
prior year’s four-year cohort.

The
field type for the Who in Steps 5-8 of Problem Solving changed in 2014-15
from a text box to a drop-down menu, which is populated with all Level 1 and 2 users for school problem solving, and with all Level 3 and 4 users for district problem solving. This change was made both to encourage the inclusion of multiple stakeholders in the planning and implementation processes, and in preparation for
upcoming project management features that will be incorporated into CIMS, such
as automated reminder messages to point persons identified in Problem Solving.
Note: Many times, these point persons are also members of a leadership
team within the school or district. If a user was
already added to the system during the completion of Part I of the SIP or DIAP, their name will appear in all drop-down menus
throughout the plan; they will not need to be added again.

Often times when multiple people are assigned to oversee an activity, deadlines are missed because one point person assumed the other point person was handling that aspect of the project, compromising the fidelity of implementation. For this reason, CIMS only allows users to identify one point person from the drop-down menu for each action step or monitoring activity.

If multiple point persons are necessary, we recommend that a main point person is selected to serve as the "central contact" for that step or activity, with the intent that the central contact would oversee the action steps or monitoring being done by other internally-noted point persons.

Any school that is required to complete Florida's SIP template pursuant to Rule 6A-1.099811, F.A.C., which includes Focus, Priority, and Former F schools, is also required to complete the Mid-Year Reflection for all goals in the SIP. SIG Cohort 3 schools, regardless of DA category, are required to complete the Mid-Year Reflection for all goals in the SIP in order to earn participation points for the annual renewal process.

Districts with Focus or Priority schools are required to complete the Mid-Year Reflection for any goals in District Problem Solving that are tagged to the DIAP. Districts with SIG Cohort 3 schools are required to complete the Mid-Year Reflection for any goals in District Problem Solving that are tagged to SIG in order to earn participation points for the annual renewal process.

The Reflection module can be used multiple times throughout the year, if desired. For example, a school may wish to complete an end-of-year reflection to close out the year before starting on the next year's School Improvement Plan. To do this, make sure the previously entered Reflection for each goal listed has been been marked Complete and the entire Reflection recorded (by using the green Record button). If the responses have been recorded you will see a date in the Last Recorded column of the Reflection Index page. You will also find a PDF version of the recorded Reflection saved on the plan's Tracking page.

Once recorded to the Tracking page, users may overwrite the responses in the Reflection module without fear of losing the old information. Simply click the View button for each goal and change the green Complete status at the top-right corner back to Editing. Then you may change the responses and toggle back to Complete. After all goals are marked Complete, make sure to click that Record button again so a new PDF is saved to the plan's Tracking page.

The School Advisory Council (SAC) is a school-based
group intended to represent the school, the community, and those persons
closest to the students. The group
shares responsibility for guiding the school toward continuous improvement. The district school board is responsible, by Florida law, for
establishing an advisory council for each school in the district and shall
develop procedures for the election and appointment of advisory council
members. Each SAC shall include in its
name the words "school advisory council." For further information, please see Section 1001.452(1)(a), Florida
Statutes.

The School Advisory Council is responsible for final decision
making at the school relating to the implementation of the provisions of the
annual School Improvement Plan (SIP). The SAC assists in the annual preparation and evaluation of both the SIP
and the school's annual budget. For
further information, please see Section 1001.452(1)(a), Florida Statutes.

A SAC should be composed of the principal and an
appropriately balanced number of teachers, education support employees,
students, parents, and other business and community citizens who are
representative of the ethnic, racial, and economic community served by the
school. Certain members are elected by
their peers, while business and community members are appointed, and the
principal automatically serves. Only
students in secondary schools serve on a SAC.
It is also a requirement that the majority of the members of the School
Advisory Council are persons who are not employed by the school district. For further information, please see Section 1001.452(1)(a), Florida Statutes.

The annual General Appropriations Act provides each SAC with up
to $5.00 per unweighted, full-time enrolled (FTE) student to be used for
implementing the School Improvement Plan.
If funds are insufficient to provide $5.00 per student after the
distribution of school recognition funds, the available funds will be prorated. The money is sent by FDOE to each district,
which forwards allocations to each local school’s SAC. For further information, please see Section 1001.42(18)(d), Florida Statutes and s. 24.121(5)(c), F.S.

Most school districts provide information about their schools' SACs on their district and/or the school websites. There's also a more expansive FAQ located in the CIMS Toolkit. The Bureau of School Improvement is working to provide clearer and more robust guidance on SAC laws and requirements, including the development of presentations to be used as training tools for SAC members.

All SIG-awarded schools and
their districts are required to fully implement the SIG model for three years,
as well as accept support, monitoring and technical assistance from the
Differentiated Accountability team and use CIMS for planning and monitoring throughout the
life of the grant, regardless of future school grades.

Any
district with a SIG-targeted school that is required to implement a turnaround
model in 2014-15 pursuant to Rule 6A-1.099811, F.A.C., but is not awarded
SIG funds for that school will be allowed to amend the plan
accordingly prior to the 2014-15 school year.

Any
district with a SIG-targeted school that is not required to implement a
turnaround model in 2014-15 pursuant to Rule 6A-1.099811, F.A.C., and is not awarded SIG funds
for that school will not be required to implement the plan.

Yes, districts that receive a SIG award will be provided technical assistance on the amendment process to be used within CIMS. Any substantive edits to the project scope or budget would need to be approved by FDOE.

Yes,
the FDOE will make three-year awards using FFY13 funds. However, funds will be
released annually based on renewal rubrics that will be scored in three parts:
documentation, implementation and performance. The renewal process is outlined
in the RFP located in the SIG Toolkit.

Districts with Title I schools identified as “Priority” or “Focus” under Florida’s Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) waiver, excluding schools that have since closed, received a new master school identification (MSID) number, or are receiving SIG 1003(g) funds in 2016-17, are eligible to apply for SIG Cohort 4. This list is posted at https://www.floridacims.org/downloads/202.

The ESEA Flexibility Priority and Focus list includes all schools falling into one or more of the following categories:

The SIG4 Intent to Apply (ITA) must be completed and submitted in CIMS by 5:00 p.m., Eastern Time, on Thursday, December 22, 2016, in order to maintain eligibility for the SIG4 competition. As a requirement of the ITA, the district must reach out to their regional executive director for a consultation on the site selection and methodology for the needs assessment. The consultation must occur prior to the ITA deadline.

To apply for SIG4, an eligible district must have an approved Risk Analysis (DOE 610) on file with the Florida Department of Education in order to be eligible for federal funding. Districts deemed "High Risk" according to the DOE 610 form are disqualified from the SIG4 competition. More information is available in Section C of the Green Book. Or, contact the Bureau of Contracts, Grants and Procurement at CGPmailbox@fldoe.org.

A district may only submit one proposal, and may select one or more implementation sites from the list of eligible schools to include in that proposal. The district must be able to
demonstrate capacity to implement the selected intervention fully and
effectively in each school included in the proposal. It is worth noting that given the limited amount of funds and the department's goal of awarding a cohort that is diverse in both district size and geographic location, a district is unlikely to be awarded for a proposal that includes more than 3-5 schools.

If a district intends to exclude a Priority school, it must demonstrate one of the following rationales in the SIG4 Intent to Apply:

The district is already implementing a SIG intervention model or an intervention aligned with all of the ESEA flexibility turnaround principles in that school using funds other than SIG funds.

The district lacks sufficient capacity to implement an intervention in the Priority school.

For charter Priority schools only, the district has provided an opportunity to the school to participate in the SIG4 proposal, and the charter school has declined.

Note: An LEA might demonstrate that it lacks sufficient capacity to serve one or more of its Priority schools by documenting efforts such as its unsuccessful attempts to recruit a sufficient number of new principals to implement the turnaround or transformation model in that school or the unavailability of CMOs or EMOs willing to restart schools in the LEA. An LEA may not demonstrate that it lacks capacity to serve one or more Priority schools based on its intent to serve Focus schools or the fact that it is
currently serving Focus schools.

While there is some overlap in the questions related to the selection rationale, each question requests that the district consider and provide distinct pieces of information.

Question 1
(By what criteria or rubric did you select and determine the district’s capacity to serve the site(s)?)
This question is asking about district capacity, meaning how the district has determined it will be able to support a full and effective implementation of a SIG intervention in all selected sites. A formal rubric or criteria list is not required but may be uploaded in Question 4 if it helps to support the description; otherwise, a description will suffice.

Question 2
(If selecting more than one site, describe why multiple sites are necessary to the district’s learning process.)
This question is applicable only if the district is proposing to serve more than one eligible site. (If not applicable, type N/A in the text field.) Even if the district finds it has the capacity to support a SIG intervention in multiple sites, why does the district find it necessary to do so? A response might include what the district hopes to improve reliably at scale through the implementation of SIG at the selected sites and/or the specific characteristics or circumstances at the sites that together will contribute to the desired learning objectives of the project.

Question 3
(If applicable, what is the district’s rationale for not including one or more eligible sites in the proposal?)
This question is applicable only if the district is not serving all of its eligible sites. (If not applicable, type N/A in the text field.) If choosing to exclude one or more sites, the district should provide a description of why the decision was made. The response may be related to the district’s capacity, or may address other reasons determined by the district, such as school-level data showing an intervention is not needed or because of other initiatives already in place at the site. For more information on the rationale for excluding sites, please see https://www.floridacims.org/faqs/270 and https://www.floridacims.org/faqs/284.

Question 4
(Documentation of the selection criteria may be uploaded in the online application, if applicable.)
This question is optional. The district should upload files only as needed to support the responses provided in Questions 1-3.

The description of the needs assessment methodology in the Intent to Apply (ITA) can include what the district has done already, and/or what the district will do to determine the needs of the implementation site(s) in order to select appropriate interventions in the proposal.

The proposal will require the district to document the results of the needs assessment, so the ITA is asking only for a summary of the methodology.

A district that has both Priority and Focus schools
on the SIG4 eligibility
list must include all of its Priority schools, including charters, before any Focus schools.

For example, if a district is interested in supporting one of its Focus schools, but it has two Priority schools on the eligibility list that are not implementing an intervention aligned to the turnaround principles, the district would need to include its two
Priority schools along with the one Focus school, and demonstrate in the proposal that the district has the capacity to serve all
three schools in a full and effective implementation.

Note: A district may exclude one or more of its eligible schools by demonstrating that it is already implementing a SIG intervention (such as restart, EMO, or whole school reform) or an intervention aligned with all of the ESEA flexibility turnaround principles (such as a State Board approved TOP) in that school using funds other than SIG 1003(g). Districts must use Question III.C.3 Excluded Sites in the Intent to Apply as needed to document the rationale for excluding one or more sites.

Districts are encouraged to use
the latest available data in determining which implementation sites to include from the eligibility list, determining needs of those sites, and selecting appropriate interventions. Reviewers
will look for evidence that the district used multiple sources of data, including
information from stakeholders; analyzed data trends over time; and conducted problem analysis to identify root causes and design strategic goals. For more information, see the Round 2 and Round 3 Protocols.

Unlike the SIG3 competition, there is no single scoring rubric for the SIG4 competition; however, there are a few documents that outline what the department will be looking for in a district's proposal.

The Round 1 Checklist will be used in the first round of the SIG4 competition to determine the extent to which the proposal demonstrates understanding and documentation of the requirements and optional components. A component of this process includes the review of the intervention-specific checklist(s) submitted by the district with the proposal. The intervention checklists are each posted at https://www.floridacims.org/downloads?category=sig-cohort-4.

The Round 2 Protocol will be used to prepare summary information for the expert panels in Round 3.

The Round 3 Protocol will be used by the expert panels to guide the review and discussion of each proposal in Round 3.

Review of district SIG4 proposals began on Monday, September
12, 2016. The Bureau of School Improvement anticipates the four rounds of
the competitive review process concluding in mid-November, followed by award
decisions in mid-December, and district notification by January 2017.

Yes, a district receiving SIG 1003(a) funds with schools on the SIG 1003(g) eligibility list may apply for SIG 1003(g). The two fund sources complement each other; therefore, the district should coordinate so that SIG 1003(g) funding is used in addition to, rather than instead of, 1003(a) funding.

The SIG4 Proposal survey must be completed and submitted in CIMS by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time (EDT) on Friday, September 9, 2016.

Form DOE 100A is the only document that requires a hard copy to be submitted; this form, with the original superintendent signature, must be received by the Florida Department of Education Office of Grants Management by 5:00 p.m. EDT on September 9, 2016. Keep in mind, a scanned copy of the completed form must also be uploaded to and submitted with the SIG4 Proposal survey in CIMS.

There is not an option to select N/A on assurances. The default setting for all assurances is NO. For any that do not apply to your selected intervention(s), meaning any that do not have a colored badge in Section II.A., leave them set to NO, unless your district is opting in to the assurance.

Note: the intervention badges remain grey until one or more interventions are selected in Section
I.B.2. If a decision is made to change interventions during the development of the proposal, the
district must look for any corresponding changes to the required fields.

Part V serves as the place where the district pulls all the pieces together to ensure the reviewers have a clear understanding of the proposal. Think of this as a high-level overview. The summary and PowerPoint presentation should address where you want your implementation site(s) to be in five years, what you want to learn as a district, and what you want to know how to scale up, sustainably, by the end of the grant. Keep in mind, that awarded districts will build upon the PowerPoint presentation annually to share lessons learned to a cross-district group (see Part II: B.3.b.).

When adopting the 5Essentials as an organizational framework for district-level work, we use "Professional Capacity" because it goes beyond the scope of the indicators measured by the school-level survey for "Collaborative Teachers."

However, in the proposal, all districts must assure that any future contracts with external providers, funded through SIG4, will be submitted and approved as a project amendment or during the annual renewal process (see Section II.B.5.b.), and that the district will disclose through the quarterly deliverable process any significant events or changes (such as new or terminated contracts with external providers) that will impact implementation of the SIG4 plan throughout the project period (see Section II.B.8.a.).

No, a completed "External Provider Information Form" for UChicago Impact is already on-file with the Bureau of School Improvement. Therefore, the district is not required to upload one. For reference, the completed form can be found in the SIG Cohort 4 tab of the Toolkit. Keep in mind, if your district proposes to use a comparable survey instrument, the "External Provider Information Form" will need to be completed and uploaded for the administrator of that survey.

To encourage districts to be concise and refrain from repeating content throughout the proposal, the majority of text fields in the SIG4 Proposal have a default limit of 150 words. Some exceptions are the Needs Assessment Results (Part I: A.), Intervention Rationale (Part I: B.2.), and Families and Communities (Part II: A.4.), which have higher word limits due to the scope of information
requested.

As you adjust your responses to fit within the established word limits, keep in mind that the proposal will be reviewed holistically. Therefore, you may be able to find another spot in the SIG4 Proposal where it makes sense to provide some of the detail, such as the Strategy Rationale text field in Step 4 of District Problem Solving.

Should you desire for the BSI team to consider an increase in word limit for a specific question, you may submit a request via Intercom. Given the reviewers will each read up to 24 proposals, please use this option sparingly.

While your SIG4 goals (Step 1a) should
reflect a long-term, 5-year vision for the SIG4 program, the targets set in Step
1b are needed for Year 1 only (2017-18). Thereafter, targets will be
set for each year as part of the annual planning and renewal process.

The district may either add new goals or build upon existing goals. Keep in mind, District Problem Solving is a central repository of district goals, barriers, and strategies for school improvement. The district must determine whether to use shared goals across the DIAP and SIG4 proposal, or to have distinct goals for each.

To include a goal in a specific plan or proposal, the respective “tag” must be applied to one or more of its strategies in Step 4. Each strategy may be tagged to the District Improvement and Assistance Plan (DIAP) and/or to a school improvement grant proposal (SIG3 and/or SIG4), which indicates to the system that the accompanying goal should be included in that particular plan and/or proposal. For detailed information on the District Problem Solving module, please review the District Problem Solving How-to Guide located in the Navigation Guides tab of the Toolkit; the tagging feature is described on pages 9-10.

Districts are not required to label each section of the proposal narrative or implementation plan to indicate which intervention criteria is met by each response, though some find it helpful for their own purposes. However, districts must use the appropriate intervention checklist (e.g., Transformation, Early Learning) to identify the location in the proposal (e.g., Part II: A.1.d.1.-2., G1.B2.S1) where each item (e.g., TRAN 1, TRAN 2) has been addressed, whether in a narrative response and/or in the implementation plan. Completed checklists must be uploaded to Part V:C. of the proposal, and will be referenced during the Round 1 review process.

Yes, action steps for Years 2-5 may be entered in District Problem Solving, if desired. However, it is important to note that no single action step should span more than one award year; this means that all Year 1 action steps should have start and end dates that occur during the period beginning August 1, 2017, and ending July 31, 2018. All Year 2 action steps should occur between August 1, 2018, and July 31, 2019, and so on.

While action steps beyond Year 1 can be included in the proposal, budget lines should only be added for Year 1 action steps! That is, do not add budget lines to action steps occurring in Years 2-5; a one-year budget will be built annually during the renewal process.

The Turnaround, Transformation and Early
Learning Model interventions require the district to replace the principal who
led the implementation site prior to commencement of the intervention. However, the federal regulations allow flexibility if the
district is able to demonstrate:

The principal at
the site was replaced after the 2013-14 school year as part of a
broader reform effort, and

The current
principal has the experience and skills needed to implement the SIG plan.

USED Guidance emphasizes that this flexibility is not intended to protect the job of that principal, but rather to permit the district to continue a previously implemented intervention aimed at turning around a low-achieving school that included hiring a new principal for that purpose.

Note: An LEA eligible for services under subpart 1 or 2 of part B of title VI of the ESEA may modify one element of the turnaround
or transformation model so long as the modification meets the intent and purpose of the original element.

Operational flexibility is a requirement of the Turnaround, Transformation and Early Learning interventions. USED does not define operational
flexibility but requires it to be “sufficient” to implementing the intervention
fully and effectively, and provides examples, such as staffing, calendars/time,
and budgeting. In determining where to offer flexibility to the school, the
district should consider what changes in decision-making policies and
mechanisms or in operational practice will be needed for the implementation
site to implement the site-level responsibilities of the selected intervention.

Consider engaging stakeholders such
as the current leadership team at the intervention site(s), union
representation, and/or district staff who provide direct support to the site(s),
in determining where additional flexibility would be beneficial.

No, only schools serving
early grades (i.e., elementary or combination) may select the early learning
intervention.

It is worth noting that any
of the requirements of early learning (e.g., principal replacement) apply to
the implementation site, not to the preschool if the preschool is provided
through a community-based provider with which the school contracts.

In this instance, the word “turnaround” refers to a
comprehensive plan to dramatically improve the school, which is not limited to
the Turnaround intervention offered under SIG.

All districts applying for SIG4 must have a CAT (or an
equivalent districtwide group under a different name) that is representative of
the demographics of the low-performing sites’ communities and is comprised of
(but not limited to) parents, business representatives, educators,
representatives of local governments, community activists, and the DA regional
executive director (RED). For the purposes of SIG4 discussions, representatives
of each site’s feeder patterns should also be included.

The
SIG4 Proposal requires a district
that selects the Transformation or Early Learning intervention to use its
evaluation system to identify and reward implementation site leaders, teachers,
and other staff who, in implementing the selected intervention for three years,
have increased student achievement and, when applicable, high school graduation
rates.

In accordance with Guidance on School Improvement Grants Under Section 1003(g) of the Elementary
and Secondary Education Act of 1965(March 2015), district must provide a Title I school operating a
schoolwide program all of the non-Federal funds the school would have received
were it not a schoolwide school; like Title I, Part A and other Federal
education funds, SIG funds must supplement those non-Federal funds.

The federal regulations for SIG 1003(g) do not set an age limit on the Early
Learning intervention. If an intervention site already has a Voluntary Pre-kindergarten
(VPK) Education Program for four-year-olds, an Early Learning intervention may
expand the program to younger children.

For the Turnaround and Transformation interventions, the district must review and modify the master schedule in each implementation site to make more efficient use of time for core instruction and enrichment activities, and if applicable, extend the school day, week, or year. The number of hours in an extended day, week, or year is not specified in the final requirements.

For the Early Learning intervention, the district must offer full day preschool and kindergarten.

For each implementation site that a district commits to serve, the district must demonstrate through the Needs Assessment Results (Part I:A.) that it has analyzed the needs of the site and the school system, including needs identified by families and the community, in the following five domains, inspired by the 5Essentials Framework: Effective Leadership, Professional Capacity, Ambitious Instruction and Learning, Safe and Supportive Environment, and Family and Community Engagement.

In the Intervention Rationale (Part I:B.3.), the district must summarize how the selected intervention will address the root causes of identified needs in at least three of those domains, one of which must must be Family and Community Engagement.

Then, the district can tag each strategy entered via District Problem Solving to one or more of the domains, which are displayed under Essential Conditions (Part III:C.), to show the alignment between the strategies to be implemented and the identified needs.

A district implementing the Turnaround intervention must use locally adopted competencies to measure the effectiveness of staff who can work within the turnaround environment to meet the needs of students, screen all existing staff and rehire no more than 50 percent, and select new staff. The screening must be completed and new staff must be in place no later than August 1, 2018.

SIG 1003(g) is a competitive grant awarded to districts for implementing one of six interventions designed to reform an entire school. Districts with specific questions regarding SIG 1003(g) should contact the Bureau of School Improvement at bsi@fldoe.org or 850-245-0426.

SIG 1003(a) is a formula-based, entitlement grant awarded to districts for implementing strategies designed to improve targeted needs. Districts with specific questions regarding SIG 1003(a) should contact Pamela Godwin in the Bureau of Federal Educational Programs at 850-245-0726 or Pamela.Godwin@fldoe.org.

No, a district may not enroll students in a preschool program supported with SIG 1003(g) funds who are not zoned for a SIG-awarded elementary school, even if they may eventually attend a SIG-awarded middle school.

Expenses for a district administrator who will serve as continuous
improvement director (CID) will be funded through a SIG4 award and must be
addressed in District Problem Solving. Budget lines for associated
CID expenses must be added to action steps for the appropriate SIG4-tagged strategy. Please consider the following annual expenses, though this is not an exhaustive list:

A district can earn up to 10 bonus points for committing to hiring a continuous improvement director (CID) or proposing an alternative strategy that
will meet the responsibilities and expectations of a CID. See page 3 of the Round 1 Checklist.

No, the continuous improvement director (CID) does not oversee the grant nor supervise the work of grantees. The CID position is supplemental and may not supplant the role of current district administrators.

Each
district must assign one district-level point person to communicate with BSI,
manage deliverables, amendments, and the annual renewal process. This person
cannot be a CID or school-level administrator.

As a member of the action research PLC, the CID’s primary
responsibility will be in support of the following mission:

Through action research we
will identify trends that inform replicable and sustainable school improvement in districts and
schools throughout the state of Florida.

The beginning stages of action research involve a great deal
of observation and documentation. During Year 1, CIDs should be in the SIG-awarded
implementation sites a minimum of three (3) days per week in order to attend,
observe, and capture events related to school improvement. This may include
conducting focus groups and observing activities, such as district and school
leadership team meetings, common planning time, student enrichment activities,
parental and community engagement events, professional development
opportunities, data reviews, instructional reviews, learning walks, and
communications regarding SIG to the School Advisory Council.

Any travel to observe similar activities outside of the
school or district must be clearly related to the research project.

It is important that the observation phase remain pure in
Year 1, which requires the CID to not take an active role in the
implementation of SIG or school improvement activities at the site. As the
research project develops in Year 2 and beyond, the work will shift from purely
evidence collection to evidence collection and support.

In all years of the grant, the CID’s calendar should be
clear for engagement in a weekly phone call with BSI staff and the other CIDs,
who form a PLC. It is worth noting that participation in this conference call
must take place in a location where the CID is free to share confidential
information critical to the research project with the members of the PLC. Additionally,
the CID should have time dedicated each week to complete research work that
includes writing field notes, data collection and analysis, and literature
documentation.

The CID position is supplemental and may not supplant the
role of current district administrators. The CID does not carry out any
of the following activities: overseeing the grant; supervising or evaluating
the work of grantees; making decisions regarding the school plan or assigning
work to the school staff; teaching classes, providing professional development,
or sponsoring activities; completing deliverables for the district; and writing
or approving amendments.

The CID reports to the regional executive director, who will
authorize the schedule of the CID in order to carry out the action research mission. See https://www.floridacims.org/faqs/293 for more details.

A district may budget for a second CID if they think it will
be necessary to carry out the mission and will need to include the rationale in
the proposal. See https://www.floridacims.org/faqs/293 for more information.

Yes. Budget lines for additional expenses related to travel
and supplies associated with supporting more implementation sites should be
included in the SIG4 Proposal. During the budget negotiation phase of the Year
1 award process, BSI and the district will discuss a stipend for the SIG3 CID
to compensate for increased work associated with additional implementation
sites. When SIG3 funds end, all budget items would need to be paid out of SIG4
and should be included in the Year 4 and 5 estimates.

To earn bonus points in SIG, the district must either assure
they will hire and fund the salary, benefits, travel, and supplies for one FTE
administrator who will serve as continuous improvement director (CID) dedicated
to studying and supporting the implementation of SIG throughout the program period, which ends July 31, 2022. The
candidate must be recruited and placed early in Year 1, according to the hiring
process stated in the CID Position Description. The district must also assure
the CID will participate in the Commissioner's Leadership Academy (CLA) with the full intention of becoming a facilitator.

Alternatively, the district may petition for bonus points
without hiring a CID by describing how the district is able to fulfill the
qualifications and responsibilities of the CID Position Description without
using the hiring process or reporting structure described therein, and assure
the candidate will be in place early in Year 1. The district must
disclose whether the position will have responsibilities additional to those outlined in the position description and describe the reporting structure and, where applicable, supplemental funding sources. The district must also assure the candidate will participate
in the CLA with the full intention of becoming a facilitator.

For SIG4-awarded districts that included the Commissioner's Leadership Academy (CLA) as a bonus strategy in the SIG4 Proposal (see Part II:A.1.f.), one instructional leader of each implementation site and one instructional leader from the district must participate in the CLA starting in Year 2 of the grant with the full intention of becoming facilitators by Year 4.

For awarded districts that included the hiring of a continuous improvement director (CID) as a bonus strategy in the SIG4 Proposal (see Part II:B.2.), the CID or district representative who will be fulfilling the responsibilities of the CID Position Description must participate in the CLA starting in Year 1 of the grant with the intention of becoming a facilitator by Year 3.

If the district has CLA graduates who will be supporting the SIG4 implementation at the school or district level, the district may earn bonus points by agreeing to send one or more of the graduates to the CLA as facilitators-in-training with the intention of becoming facilitators.

Yes. If a district is hiring a continuous improvement director (CID), then the Year 1 budget should include a line item of $4,000 for the CID to participate in the CLA. This amount includes the content, travel, meals and hotel.

The budget estimates for Years 2, 3 and 4 should incorporate $4,000 for each CID, principal and school or district leader who will attend or facilitate the CLA. For more information, see https://www.floridacims.org/faqs/281.

Yes, each district must include the cost of the 5Essentials Survey, or comparable evidence-based survey(s), in their budget for Year 1 and factor the cost into the budget estimates for Years 2-5, unless the survey(s) will be administered districtwide. If administered districtwide, SIG4 funds cannot be used as that would be considered supplanting.

Remember, regardless of the survey instrument(s) being used, feedback must be collected annually from, at a minimum, students in grades 4-12, teachers, and parents.

For districts that will administer the 5Essentials Survey in their implementation site(s), the annual cost will not exceed $1,748 per school. This cost includes preparation, administration, scoring, and reporting. District leaders, principals, and school leadership teams must complete a two-part, online training program, but this will be provided free of charge through the e-Learning section of the CIMS Toolkit.

For any proposed comparable survey, the district must determine the cost and ensure all associated budget lines are included for Year 1 and factored into the estimates for Years 2-5.

For the SIG4 Proposal survey, the district must enter specific budget lines for Year 1 (August 1, 2017 - July 31, 2018) and estimated budget amounts for Years 2-5. The estimates provided will be adjusted as needed during each annual planning and renewal process.

The Florida Department of Education (FDOE) has instituted the following annual budget caps:

For Years 1 and 2 combined, the district budget is not to exceed $2,500,000.

For Year 3, the district budget is not to exceed $750,000.

For Year 4, the district budget is not to exceed $500,000.

For Year 5, the district budget is not to exceed $250,000.

It is also worth noting that the annual district budget may not be less than $50,000.

SIG Cohort 4 grantees are expected to participate in the program and receive funding for five years. However, funds are released annually based upon the
district meeting the annual thresholds for renewal. Annual budgets are
negotiated as part of the planning and renewal process. The
renewal process is outlined on page 6 of the Florida’s Application to USED
located in the SIG Toolkit.

To enter indirect costs for Year 1, go to the SIG4 Proposal Budget page, click on the Administrative Costs tab, and click the green +Add Budget Line button under Indirect Costs to add one budget line. Select "7200 - General Administration" as the Function Code and "790 - Miscellaneous Expenses" as the Object Code.

Estimated indirect costs for Years 2-5 should be entered on the 5-Year Budget page (Part IV:B.).

Budgets cannot be uploaded to the SIG4 Proposal. All budget lines for Year 1, except the budget line for indirect costs, must be entered via the SIG4 Proposal Budget page, under the District Problem Solving tab; the budget line for indirect costs should be entered under the Administrative Costs tab (see https://www.floridacims.org/faqs/302). After budget lines are saved, a CSV file can be downloaded for district reference through the Summary/Reports tab. However, any changes needed to the budget prior to submission must be made by editing the individual budget lines in CIMS; a file cannot be uploaded.

Individual budget lines should not be entered for Years 2-5; however, districts must enter estimated amounts needed for each year across the categories listed on the 5-Year Budget page.

No, function and object codes are only required for the Year 1 budget, entered on the SIG4 Proposal Budget page. For Years 2-5, districts must record only the estimated amounts needed for the list of categorical expenses outlined on the 5-Year Budget page.

Performance bonuses should be factored into the Year 4 estimated
budget in section IV.B.

Per Assurance II.A.2.h.4. for Early Learning and
Transformation interventions, performance bonuses are intended for “implementation
site leaders, teachers, and other staff who, in implementing the selected
intervention for three years, have increased student achievement and high school
graduation rates.” The three years of implementation referenced here are
Year 2 (2017-18), Year 3 (2018-19), and Year 4 (2019-20). Should the
relevant 2019-2020 data (e.g., school grades, VAM) not be available by August
30, 2020, the district would need to request a no-cost extension to expend the
Year 4 money allocated to performance bonuses.

Generally, no. SIG 1003(g) funds must be used to implement the SIG intervention(s) in the school(s) identified in the approved proposal as "implementation sites."

However, if the district is using SIG 1003(g) funds in one or more implementation sites for a service that it does not provide to all schools in the district, and it does not cost the grant to allow other schools to benefit, it may be allowable to do so. Districts with specific questions regarding allowable uses of SIG 1003(g) funds should email bsi@fldoe.org.

If a bulk discount is available for district-wide purchases for initiatives approved in the SIG proposal, allowing the district to purchase at a cost lower than that for individual site purchases, then a district-wide purchase may be allowable. However, the cost would need to be pro-rated based on the number of schools benefiting from the purchase, and only the portion of the cost for the SIG implementation sites could be paid for with SIG 1003(g) funds. Districts with specific questions regarding allowable uses of SIG 1003(g) funds should email bsi@fldoe.org.

For districts competing for a SIG 1003(g) in Cohort 4, administering the 5Essentials Survey, or comparable survey(s), in 2017 would
provide the district with baseline data in anticipation of receiving a SIG 1003(g) award for 2017-18. Using non-federal funds in 2017, and then using SIG
1003(g) funds in 2018 and for the duration of the project period, is allowable if the district can document that the survey would not be administered should SIG 1003(g) or other federal funds be unavailable. Evidence of this intention is necessary to avoid a presumption of supplanting. Districts with specific questions regarding allowable uses of SIG 1003(g) funds should email bsi@fldoe.org.

Generally, a district may not use SIG 1003(g) funds for strategies that are already being implemented in the school, such as a State Board-approved turnaround plan. However, a district may use SIG 1003(g) funds to enhance and add to strategies already in place. Additionally, it may be allowable to use SIG 1003(g) funds if other funding sources currently used for the strategy are no longer available. The district must ensure each SIG implementation site continues to receive all local, state, and other federal funds that it would in the absence of SIG 1003(g) funds. Districts with specific questions regarding allowable uses of SIG 1003(g) funds should email bsi@fldoe.org.

Pursuant to section 1011.62(1)(f), F.S., districts with one or more of the 300 lowest-performing elementary schools based on state reading assessments must use supplemental academic instruction categorical funds, together with the funds provided in the district’s research-based reading instruction allocation and other available funds, to provide an additional hour of intensive reading instruction each day of the entire school year. If a SIG4 implementation site that is on the 2016-17 "Lowest 300" list comes off the list for 2017-18, it would be allowable to use non-federal funds in 2016-17, and then SIG 1003(g) funds in 2017-18 and for the duration of the project period, if the district can document that the additional hour would not otherwise be provided in the absence of SIG 1003(g) or other federal funds. Evidence of this intention is necessary to avoid a presumption of supplanting. Any changes that are necessary to the district's SIG proposal can be made during the annual renewal process or through a project amendment, depending on the timing of the release of future Low 300 lists. Districts with specific questions regarding allowable uses of SIG 1003(g) funds should email bsi@fldoe.org.

Cohort 4 of SIG 1003(g) will continue to be regulated by NCLB throughout the project period (through 2021). The department will monitor any changes to state statute or rule that come as a result of ESSA and will provide technical assistance as needed to ensure alignment is maintained with the SIG 1003(g) grant requirements.

Each awarded district and
implementation site will receive direct support from its regional team, led by
the regional executive director. Support will be differentiated according to
need, but at a minimum will include annual review and feedback on school and
district improvement plans and mid-year reflections on SIG goals, and annual
completion of the District
Monitoring Toolkit. Each district with a continuous improvement director (CID) will
have access to the support and resources provided by the Commissioner’s
Leadership Academy and the CID Research Professional Learning Community.

Additionally, the Bureau of School Improvement provides ongoing support through online resources, district convenings,
and email communications.

The assurance found in Part II:A.2.h.4. for the Early Learning and Transformation interventions states, “the district must use the evaluation
system to identify and reward implementation site leaders, teachers, and other staff who, in implementing the selected intervention for three years, have
increased student achievement and high school graduation rates.” The intention is that site leaders, teachers, and eligible staff would have been on board for all three years to receive the bonus at the end of Year 4, however, exceptions may arise such as replacing the principal and hiring new coaches or teachers.

The district must assure it will administer the 5Essentials Survey, or comparable evidence-based survey(s), to students, teachers, and parents at each
implementation site annually, starting in January 2018. If proposing to use a survey instrument, or set of instruments, comparable to the 5Essentials Survey,
the district must identify the instrument(s) and provide a rationale for its selection in the proposal. Be sure to follow the instructions provided in the
blue Guidance tab when completing Part II:B.4. (i.e., Participation in 5Essentials Survey or Comparable Survey[s]).

The following response is compiled from the Guidance on School Improvement Grants posted by the U.S. Department of Education in March 2015.

The following
activities are examples of possible planning and pre-implementation activities
that an LEA may carry out using SIG funds, depending on the needs of particular
SIG schools. This is not an exhaustive list, nor are all activities necessarily
appropriate for all LEAs or schools. Rather, they represent activities that might be appropriate if they are directly related to the selected intervention, are reasonable and necessary for full and effective implementation, are designed to address specific needs identified through the needs assessment, represent a meaningful change that could help improve student achievement, are research-based, and represent a significant reform that goes beyond the basic educational program.

Family and Community
Engagement: Hold
community meetings to review school performance, discuss the school
intervention model to be implemented, and develop school improvement plans in
line with the intervention model selected; survey students and parents to gauge
needs of students, families, and the community; communicate with parents and
the community about school status, improvement plans, choice options, and local
service providers for health, nutrition, or social services through press
releases, newsletters, newspaper announcements, parent outreach coordinators,
hotlines, and direct mail.

Rigorous Review of
External Providers: Conduct
the required rigorous review process to properly recruit,
screen, and select any external providers that may be necessary to assist in
planning for the implementation of an intervention model (see H-19a).

Staffing: Recruit and hire the
incoming principal, leadership team, instructional staff, and administrative
support; or evaluate the strengths and areas of need of current staff.

Instructional Programs:
Provide
remediation and enrichment to students through programs with evidence of
raising achievement; identify and purchase instructional materials that are
research-based and aligned with State academic standards, and have data-based
evidence of raising student achievement; or compensate staff for instructional
planning, such as examining student data, developing a curriculum that is
aligned to State standards and aligned vertically from one grade level to
another, collaborating within and across disciplines, and devising student
assessments.

Professional
Development and Support: Train staff on the implementation of new or revised
instructional programs and policies that are aligned with the school’s
comprehensive instructional plan and the school’s intervention model; provide
instructional support for returning staff members, such as classroom coaching,
structured common planning time, mentoring, consultation with outside experts,
and observations of classroom practice, that is aligned with the school’s
comprehensive instructional plan and the school’s intervention model; or train
staff on the new evaluation system and locally adopted competencies.

Preparation for Accountability Measures: Develop
and pilot a data system for use in SIG-funded schools; analyze data on leading
baseline indicators; or develop and adopt interim assessments for use in
SIG-funded schools.

In order
to ensure that improvements made as a result of the grant are sustained after SIG 1003(g) funding ends, the department has instituted annual budget caps that taper over Years 3, 4, and 5.

As provided by Guidance on School Improvement Grants posted by the U.S. Department of Education in March 2015, "Sustainability
plans should place an emphasis on building structures, systems, and processes
to support reform efforts, including the creation of formal mechanisms and
feedback loops to capture data from the field to inform continuous professional
development and effective program implementation; shifting existing resources
to support activities that have demonstrated success; and creating and
sustaining strategic partnerships with community stakeholders that assist in
maintaining community support and leveraging resources after the grant period
ends.

"Some
examples of activities to sustain reforms include training trainers within the
LEA or school to develop staff capacity; developing performance management and
continuous improvement processes; creating SIG budgets that invest funds
strategically and gradually decrease each year; developing leadership
pipelines, including distributed leadership strategies; creating ongoing,
meaningful family and community engagement opportunities on planning
committees, advisory boards and work groups; and involving students in
age-appropriate leadership opportunities to increase self-direction and
responsibility."

No, project funds for Year 1 will not be issued until August 1, 2017. As a result of lessons learned and district feedback during implementation of prior SIG cohorts, it was determined that an August 1–July 31 grant year would be more advantageous for this program. For example, in prior SIG implementations it created a barrier for districts to have summer program funding split between two fiscal years. Additionally, districts were frequently requesting no-cost extensions during the summer months as they awaited data needed to pay out performance bonuses.

By extending the SIG4 competition to December 29, 2016, the resulting review process for the second cycle of proposals will not conclude until Spring 2017; an August 1 start date allows all SIG4-awarded districts to operate on the same implementation timeline. Districts will be notified as soon as possible of their award status so they can begin planning and pre-implementation activities that do not incur costs prior to the award being issued on August 1. For examples of planning and pre-implementation activities,
including some that do not incur costs, please review this FAQ.

Districts that are prepared to begin full implementation during Year 1 may certainly do so, if the activities are written into the Year 1 plan. If the district is ahead of schedule, an amendment may need to be submitted.

No. Section 1001.42, Florida Statutes (F.S.), requires districts to annually approve and require implementation of a SIP for each school in the district which has a school grade of "D" or "F". This includes virtual schools and alternative centers such as DJJ or ESE facilities.

Charter schools are exempt from this requirement, pursuant to section 1002.33(16), Florida Statutes, unless they have a grade of D or F, in which case they must follow the requirements of Rule 6A-1.099827, Florida Administrative Code.

No. Some school districts require their schools to complete the department's SIP using CIMS. Otherwise, only schools identified for Differentiated Accountability (DA) support and/or recipients of the school improvement grant 1003(g) are required to complete the department's template.

Pursuant to Section 1001.42(18), Florida Statutes, it is the responsibility of each district school board to approve school improvement plans. "D" or "F" schools are required to submit their school improvement plans through CIMS for the review and feedback of a regional executive director (RED) in advance of the SIP publication deadline; however, the RED does not formally approve the plan.

All schools are welcome to use the Reflection module in CIMS to complete a Mid-Year Reflection. However, a Mid-Year Reflection for each SIP goal is required for "D" or "F" schools (as identified on the DA List), and SIG 1003(g) Cohort 3 and 4 schools. Check out this FAQ for information on the Mid-Year Reflection deadline.

For step-by-step instructions on completing and recording a Reflection, please review the Reflection How-to Guide for Schools located in the Navigation Guides tab of the Toolkit.

For schools not in Differentiated Accountability (DA), districts may set timelines for the submission and publication of SIPs as desired.

For schools in DA (i.e., Focus, Priority, and Former F schools) based upon 2017 school grades and for all SIG Cohort 3 and 4 schools, the following timeline applies for the 2017-18 school year:

Early June 2017: 2017-18 SIP opens in CIMS

By September 15, 2017: Draft of the SIP forwarded in CIMS from the district to the regional executive director (RED) for review (schools must submit to the district first)

By October 13, 2017: SIP feedback provided by RED or regional team to the district; school then revises SIP in CIMS, if needed, before district approval

By October 31, 2017: SIP approved by district and published in CIMS (if edits have been made after the RED review, school must resubmit to district for approval first)

It is worth noting that while the department establishes deadlines to facilitate the DA regional team's review of SIPs, districts may set earlier deadlines for schools to allow for the district’s review process.

Submission deadlines are important milestones for auditing purposes; however, the SIP is intended to be used and refined throughout the year.

Once a plan has been published, the Reflection module opens for use. Schools on the Differentiated Accountability (DA) List, and/or schools that are members of the School Improvement Grant 1003(g) Cohort 3, must log-in to CIMS, complete the Reflection questions for each SIP goal, and Record the Reflection within 30 days of the release of the district's mid-year assessment data, or by March 15, 2018, whichever comes first.

For step-by-step instructions on completing and recording a Reflection, please review the Reflection How-to Guide for Schools located in the Navigation Guides tab of the Toolkit.

By default, the first set of fields in a membership list cannot be deleted. Therefore, if the person identified first in the list is no longer an active member, then you should simply overwrite that listing to reflect a current member. If that current member is already identified further down on the list, then use the red trashcan button to delete the duplicate entry.

In order for the members to appear in the drop-down menu, they must be registered CIMS users. To add new users, click the Manage Users button at the top-right corner of the screen. If that button is not displayed, you may also click Account > Manage Users and then the green + New User button. Enter the information requested, including a temporary password, and then click the blue Update button. Note: If a user does not need editing rights, you may set them as a Level 1 user and click the Read Only slide bar to display the check mark.

More information on user management can be found in the User Management Guide in the Toolkit.

The
field type for these questions, as well as the Who in Steps 5-8 of Problem Solving,
changed in 2014-15 from a text box to a drop-down menu, which is populated with
all Level 1 and 2 users registered for the school. This is to acclimate
Level 2 users to the user management process in preparation for upcoming
project management features that will be incorporated into CIMS, such as
automated reminder messages to point persons identified in Problem Solving.
Many times, these point persons are also members of a leadership team within
the school so it seemed a logical decision to change the field type of these
questions as well. Note: Once a user is added to the system, their
name will appear in all drop-down menus throughout the SIP; they will not need
to be added again.

Logged in users may print an unpublished SIP through its Plan Dashboard. Click Plans in the main menu bar, click the teal Dashboard button next to the plan you wish to print, and then click the green PDF Export button. This will generate a PDF file that may be saved to your computer and/or printed. If you recently worked in the plan, then you can quickly access the Plan Dashboard by clicking the link in the Recently Accessed pod on My Dashboard.

Section 1001.42(18)(a)2., Florida Statutes, adds the
requirement that schools with grades 6, 7 or 8 include the following EWS information
and data in their school improvement plans:

Information
about the system, which must include a list of indicators used, the number of
students by grade level that exhibited each indicator in the prior year, the
number of students exhibiting two or more indicators in the prior year, and a
description of intervention strategies implemented to improve performance of
identified students

Description
of the specific strategies used by the school to implement the instructional
practices emphasized by the district’s professional development system.

No, this section is only requiredfor schools
with grades 6, 7, or 8, pursuant to section 1001.42(18)(a)2., Florida Statutes.
However, as the monitoring of EWS data is a research-based best practice, this section was left “open” to all schools. If this
section is not required for your school and you do not wish to complete it, you
may mark the page status in the upper right corner as “N/A.”

Schools with grades 6, 7 or 8 are required to provide, at a minimum, the number of students in grades 6, 7 or 8 by grade level who exhibit each of the following early warning indicators in the prior year:

Attendance below 90 percent

One or more suspensions

Course failure in English language arts or mathematics

Level 1 on statewide assessment in English language arts or mathematics

Two or more of the indicators above

Schools should also report data for any indicators included in their EWS that are not listed above.

The purpose of recording EWS data in the SIP is to look for trends to inform the needs assessment process prior to determining strategic goals and action plans for the coming school year; therefore, summative data from the previous school year should be used.

This practice is not to be confused with the ongoing use of the EWS throughout the year to identify and support students who become off track. For year-round monitoring, school teams should continue to review the most current data available.

Yes, the Bureau of School Improvement collaborates with the Bureau of Federal Educational Programs to ensure all components required under Sections 1114(b) and (c), P.L. 107-110, NCLB, codified at 20 U.S.C. § 6314 are embedded. More specific references to NCLB are included for each component within CIMS. Additionally, a crosswalk may be found at https://www.floridacims.org/downloads?category=sip.

Only charter schools (including virtual charter schools) that have received a grade of D or F in the most recent grades release are required to develop and submit a school improvement plan to the sponsor, following the requirements of Rule 6A-1.099827, Florida Administrative Code.

No, unless the district has required the same deadline. While charter schools are required to have a school improvement plan, they are not subject to the requirements of Differentiated Accountability. If a charter school has a current grade of D or F, they must follow the accountability requirements of Rule 6A-1.099827, Florida Administrative Code.

No. While charter schools with a current grade of D or F are required to have a school improvement plan, they are not subject to the requirements of Differentiated Accountability. Charter schools must follow the accountability requirements of Rule 6A-1.099827, Florida Administrative Code.

Yes. Section 1001.42, Florida Statutes (F.S.), requires districts to annually approve, and require implementation of, a SIP for each school in the district, which includes alternative centers such as DJJ or exceptional student education (ESE).

Yes, some virtual school types are required to develop and submit a SIP pursuant to section 1001.42, Florida Statutes (F.S.). Florida Virtual School (FLVS) Full-Time K-8 and FLVS Full-Time 9-12 as well as FLVS district franchises and full-time district virtual instruction programs are required to have a SIP. Virtual instruction programs managed by an approved provider, as described in section 1002.45 F.S., are only required to submit a SIP if the school has received a grade of D or F in the most recent grades release.

The budget amount fields in CIMS do not accept the dollar sign, so make sure to enter numbers and decimals only before saving. Refresh your browser after saving new budget lines to update the total amount that appears in the tab at the top of the page.

Community Eligibility
Provision (CEP) schools were eligible for this meal option for first time in 2013-14(pilot year).
The poverty rate of schools participating in CEP only includes students who are
identified as eligible for free meals based upon the Direct Certification
determination (or the extension of eligibility to the household due to
eligibility of an identified direct-certified student). This causes the school’spoverty rate to appear lower
than in previous years when the rate included students
eligible for free and reduced-priced lunch. For more information
about the CEP, see http://www.fns.usda.gov/school-meals/community-eligibility-provision.

To ensure the CSV file uploads correctly, please review the following tips:

The file must be a CSV (i.e., comma-separated values) format file. The file downloaded from CIMS originally was in this format. Any other format, such as a full Excel spreadsheet, will not be understood by the system; think of it as a format that speaks a different language than the system. If you have been working in Excel, be sure to save your data as a CSV file and then upload that version to CIMS.

If you have been working in Excel, keep in mind that Excel tends to change grade spans (e.g., 6-8) into dates (e.g., June 8). You can avoid this by entering a single-quote (') ahead of the grade span (e.g., '6-8). This tells Excel that you would like the content of the cell to be evaluated as text only. Again, be sure to save your data as CSV file when you are ready to upload that version.

Be sure that any quotation marks used are straight up-and-down single quotes (i.e., ' ). Quotation marks that tilt in one direction or another (aka “curly quotes") cause problems for computer programs and should not be used in your data file.

It can be done, but it is only recommended with reservations, due to the high risk that one person will over-write the work of another.

Web applications work via requests. You send a request to a web page to view it, then you fill out a form and send another request to submit that information to the server and get back a response. The web is stateless, which means one request does not know anything about previous or future requests made by you or any other user. We have also implemented an auto-save feature in our application - when you click the "Next" or "Previous" buttons, for instance, the application automatically saves your page - which complicates matters further.

So what can possibly happen goes like this:

Person A requests a plan page

Person B requests the same plan page

Person A makes changes and submits the page

Person B clicks the "Next" button

Auto-save kicks in, which submits the original page data

This results in over-writing the changes Person A made

We have implemented some features and steps you can take to help to prevent accidental over-writes.

Read Only mode is a temporary, user-controlled setting that allows the user to move around in a survey without inadvertently changing anything via the auto-save feature.

The Read Only button is located at the top of the left navigation tree in any given plan. If it is red, you are in read only mode. Click the button to toggle into edit mode. Click it again to go back to read only mode. It is a good rule of thumb to leave the button toggled to Read Only until you are ready to make edits to a given page.

In order for team
members to appear in a drop-down menu, they must be registered CIMS users. To add new users, click the blue Manage Users button
in the upper right-hand corner of the screen. If that button is not
displayed, you may also click Account > Manage Users and
then the green + New User button. Enter the information
requested, including a temporary password, and then click the blue Update button. Note: You
must have Level 2 or 4 access in order to manage users. If a user does not
need editing rights, you may set them as a Level 1 user and click
the Read Only slide bar to display the check mark.

More information on user
management can be found in the User Management Guide in
the Toolkit.

In order for a plan to be published, it must go through an approval process in CIMS, which varies based on the survey (e.g., SIP, DIAP) and whether the respective school or district is subject to the requirements of Differentiated Accountability. In all cases, the process ends with a district contact who has "Can Approve" access clicking the Approve button in Tracking.

Once a plan is approved, it will be published by an automated process that runs on a regular schedule throughout the day. After approval, but before publishing, the plan will be locked to editing. Once a snapshot of the plan is published, the plan is reopened for editing. For more detailed information about the approval processes, see the SIP Submission How-to Guide located in the Navigation Guides tab of the Toolkit.

It's important to remember that PDF documents generated by CIMS are really just PDF renderings of specific HTML pages. When you click the PRINT PREVIEW button for a particular document, you are seeing the same HTML page on-screen that will ultimately become the PDF document when you get the PDF export.

Unlike a word processor, which will cut content right in the middle in order to wrap to the specific size settings that you have specified, a web browser will generally only line-break content at recognized end-of-content markers: spaces, punctuation marks, etc. If a string of content does not have any of the normal end-of-content markers, then the web browser will instead usually expand the box wrapping the content to fit the content. When that happens, you can get a ripple effect throughout the document such that all content expands to match the one box that has been outsized.

Very long URLs for links are a common source of content that runs to multiple lines without any of the normal end-of-content markers, and are the most common cause of PDF layout in CIMS going awry and running off the right side of the page.

To fix this problem, find any very long URLs in your content and, using a link shortening service such as http://bit.ly or http://tinyurl.com, substitute a shorter URL for the original one. Once you have done this, refresh the Print Preview and you should see everything line up correctly. Then you can generate your PDF and it, too, will be laid out without the run-off issues.

If you have Level 2, 4 or 6 access, you may remove users from your list by going to Account > Manage Users. Click the teal Edit User button beside the name of the user you need to remove. Next, un-check all schools, districts, or regions for which they currently have access. Then, set the user's Role to Level 0 and click the blue Update button. This will limit the user to the level of access of a public visitor and remove them from your lists. See related FAQ: https://www.floridacims.org/faqs/170.

Although school leadership (i.e., Level 2 users) can
modify accounts for users already attached to their school, they cannot switch
a user from another school to their own. Therefore, a district contact (i.e.,
Level 4 user) will need to either (1) make the change for the school, or (2)
make the user a Level 0 so school leadership can find the account and attach it
to their school. Instructions for Level 4 users needing to make these changes can be found in the User Management Guide.

Once a user account is made a Level 0, a Level 2 user for the school can locate the account by navigating to Account > Manage Users and changing the Access Level filter to Level 0. This will display all Level 0 users in the system alphabetically. Scroll down to locate the account that needs to be updated and make the necessary changes. You may also search for an account on the Users page by typing a user name in the User field.

If you receive this error message, it means that the user you are trying to add already has an account. However, because the user is not assigned to your school, you cannot see him/her in your Manage Users list.

It is likely that the user was previously assigned to a different school and his/her access has been deactivated, or set to Level 0. If this is the case, you can locate the account by navigating to Account > Manage Users and changing the Access Level filter to Level 0. This will display all Level 0 users in the system alphabetically, so you can scroll down and find the account you need to update.

If the user's name appears on the Level 0 list, click the Edit button for that account, set the user's access to the appropriate level, and attach them to your school. If the user's name does not appear on the Level 0 list, then the account is still active and attached to another school. In this case, you will need to reach out to your district school improvement contact (found on your SIP's Tracking page) to change the account, as they have access to all schools in your district and will be able to make the necessary changes.

The job title menus in CIMS are populated with data from Appendix J: Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) Line Numbers of DOE Information Data Base Requirements: Volume II - Automated Staff Information System. Since the options in the list cannot be altered, please select the job title that most closely matches.

No, for each data upload, the hyperlink to the file and
description entered by the user will be displayed. Only data captured in a Portfolio from the Step Zero moduleand pulled into the Title I,
Part A survey will display as graphs and charts embedded within the Needs Assessment page.

The Step Zero module and Portfolios feature are optional tools available in CIMS to assist in the district's needs assessment process. The only fields required on the Part II: Needs Assessment page in the TIPA application are the narrative responses labeled Problem Identification Summary and Problem Analysis.

No, the LEA is not required to add activities for all of the
Program Requirements. Although the Activities feature is available in 10
of the 12 subsections, the LEA should add activities aligned to the needs
identified in II. Needs Assessment within the relevant Program Requirement subsection(s).It
is worth noting that LEAs may also choose to add activities using the District Problem Solving module.

No, the LEA should record each activity only once to avoid
duplication in the application. Therefore, the LEA should review the applicable
Program Requirements and capture the
activity under the one that seems to be the “best fit.”

Often times when multiple
people are assigned to oversee an activity, deadlines are missed because one
point person assumed the other point person was handling that aspect of the
project, compromising the fidelity of implementation. For this reason, CIMS
only allows users to identify one point person from the drop-down menu for each
activity entered in Programs
Requirements.

However, when creating a district-level action plan, there
will be instances where multiple people will be implementing an activity (e.g.,
an activity that is to be implemented by the principal of each elementary
school in the district). In cases such as these, you may find that it works
best to select a main district point person to serve as the "central
contact" for that activity, with the intent that that person would be
knowledgeable of the implementation of the other internally-noted point persons
(e.g., elementary school principals).

Often times when multiple
people are assigned to oversee an activity, deadlines are missed because one
point person assumed the other point person was handling that aspect of the
project, compromising the fidelity of implementation. For this reason, CIMS
only allows users to identify one point person from the drop-down menu for each
monitoring activity in a district-level application.

However, when creating a
district-level plan, there will be instances where multiple people will be
monitoring the fidelity of implementation or effectiveness of a strategy (e.g.,
an activity that is to be monitored locally by the principal of each school in
the district). In cases such as these, you may find that it works best to
select a main district point person to serve as the "central contact"
for that monitoring activity, with the intent that that person would be
knowledgeable of and oversee the monitoring being done by the other
internally-noted point persons (e.g., school principals).

The summary markers on each Plan Dashboard indicate the number of strategies, as well as the associated goals and barriers, that have been tagged to that specific survey via the District Problem Solving module. If no strategies were tagged TIPA in Step 4 of District Problem Solving, then all three markers will display a zero on the Plan Dashboard for the 2015-16 TIPA survey.

As District Problem Solving is an optional component of the TIPA application, the number of summary markers on the Plan Dashboard has no bearing on the submission of the 2015-16 TIPA survey.

There are five types of expenses that can be added
as budget lines in the TIPA application:

District-level
expenses with set-aside codes – These are expenses the LEA takes off
the top of its TIPA allocation, before allocating funds to eligible school
attendance areas that are directly tied to an activity under Program Requirements, District Initiatives or District Problem Solving. In the relevant budget line(s) in CIMS, these expenses are indicated by leaving the Budget Focus set to District and selecting one of the set-aside codes from the drop-down menu labeled SA.

District-level
expenses without set-aside codes – These are expenses the LEA takes off
the top of its TIPA allocation, before allocating funds to eligible school
attendance areas that are not directly tied to an activity. These expenses must be entered as budget lines within the Administrative Costs tab of the TIPA Budget page, and are indicated by leaving the Budget Focus set to District and the set-aside code (SA) marked as N/A.

School-level
expenses with B-1 set-aside code – These are aggregate, school-level
expenses accounting for how the funds allocated in the Public School
Eligibility Survey for parental involvement activities (i.e., the Parental
Involvement Reservation) will be expended. They may be added to the TIPA Budget page under Program Requirements or District Problem Solving. In the relevant budget line(s) in CIMS, these expenses are indicated by setting the Budget Focus to Public Schools Allocation and selecting B-1 from the list of set-aside codes found under SA.

School-level
expenses for public school services – These are aggregate,
school-level expenses accounting for how the funds allocated in the Public
School Eligibility Survey will be expended. They may be added to activities under Program Requirements or District Problem Solving. In the relevant budget line(s) in CIMS, these expenses are indicated by setting the Budget Focus to Public Schools Allocation and leaving the set-aside code (SA) marked as N/A.

School-level
expenses for private school services – These are aggregate,
school-level expenses accounting for how the funds generated in the
Private School Eligibility Survey will be expended. They may be added to activities under Program Requirements or District Problem Solving. In the relevant budget line(s) in CIMS, these expenses are indicated by setting the Budget Focus to Private Schools Reservation and leaving the set-aside code (SA) marked as N/A.

Yes, an LEA can add direct and indirect costs
under the Administrative Costs tab
of the TIPA Budget page. For more
information on the Budget, review
the Title I, Part A Survey How-to Guide located
in the TIPA
tab of the CIMS Toolkit.

Section 1010.01, Florida Statutes, provides for a uniform
classification of accounts. Each school district should prepare all accounting
records, including the budget, using the uniform chart of accounts in the Financial
and Program Cost Accounting and Reporting for Florida Schools (Red Book)
pursuant to rule 6A-1.001, Florida Administrative Code. If a school district
has its own unique chart of accounts, it must devise a crosswalk to conform and
report the budget in accordance with the accounts in the Red Book.

For the TIPA budget, LEAs may use the Notes text field in each budget line to list any relevant LEA-specific codes.

Yes, the most commonly used university codes are included. University lab schools should leave the function
code set to N/A and scroll to the bottom of the object code menu to find the
6-digit university codes. If you find a code that you need is missing, please contact bsi@fldoe.org.

Yes, an LEA could choose to
address an LEA Plan requirement using the District Problem Solving module. In this case, it would be advisable for the LEA to write a clear statement of reference in place of the response to the
respective LEA Plan question(s) in the TIPA survey (e.g., "See Goal 1, Barrier 1, Strategy 1,
which addresses this component.”). The strategy being used in District Problem Solving to address the
component would also need to be tagged “TIPA” so that it appears in the application.

The District Problem Solving module is a shared repository of strategic goals for the district, which can be used in fulfillment of the TIPA, DIAP and/or SIG. For this reason, it is possible that multiple district users could be working within District Problem Solving at the same time. To avoid accidentally overwriting someone else's work, district beta testers requested an added layer of security. District Problem Solving now defaults to Read-Only mode when navigating. When you are ready to enter information, simply click the red Edit Mode Off button so that it turns gray and reads Edit Mode On.

If you are completing the Public School Eligibility Survey by using the CSV template, please review the following uploading tips:

The file must be a CSV (i.e., comma-separated values) format file. The file downloaded from CIMS originally was in this format. Any other format, such as a full Excel spreadsheet, will not be understood by the system; think of it as a format that speaks a different language than the system. If you have been working in Excel, be sure to save your data as a CSV file and then upload that version to CIMS.

Columns in the CSV file must not be added, deleted, rearranged, or relabeled.

The prepopulated data found in columns A through H must not be changed.

If you have been working in Excel, keep in mind that Excel tends to change grade spans (e.g., 6-8) into dates (e.g., June 8). You can avoid this by entering a single-quote (') ahead of the grade span (e.g., '6-8). This tells Excel that you would like the content of the cell to be evaluated as text only. Again, be sure to save your data as CSV file when you are ready to upload that version.

Be sure that any apostrophes in school names and any quotation marks used are straight up-and-down, single quotes (i.e., ' ). Quotation marks that tilt in one direction or another (aka "curly quotes") cause problems for computer programs and should not be used in your data file.

If you are completing the Private School Eligibility Survey (PvSES) by using the CSV template, please review the following uploading tips:

The file must be a CSV (i.e., comma-separated values) format file. The file downloaded from CIMS originally was in this format. Any other format, such as a full Excel spreadsheet, will not be understood by the system; think of it as a format that speaks a different language than the system. If you have been working in Excel, be sure to save your data as a CSV file and then upload that version to CIMS.

The template is specific to the selection you made under Form Type and, therefore, will not upload if you change the selection. For example, if you download the CSV template when Form A – Free and Reduced Price Lunch is selected and then try to upload that file after changing your selection to Form B – Proportionality, then the upload functionality will not work.

If you change your selection under Form Type after downloading and populating the CSV file, then you must download a new CSV template, copy-and-paste the data from the old CSV file into that new template, and upload the new CSV file.

If you have been working in Excel, keep in mind that Excel tends to change grade spans (e.g., 6-8) into dates (e.g., June 8). You can avoid this by entering a single-quote (') ahead of the grade span (e.g., '6-8). This tells Excel that you would like the content of the cell to be evaluated as text only. Again, be sure to save your data as CSV file when you are ready to upload that version.

Be sure that any apostrophes in school names and any quotation marks used are straight up-and-down, single quotes (i.e., ' ). Quotation marks that tilt in one direction or another (aka "curly quotes") cause problems for computer programs and should not be used in your data file.

Guidance

FAQ

The FAQ page contains the most commonly asked questions, organized by category and then subcategory. Select a category followed by a subcategory; then, click the desired question to reveal the answer. You will also see the last updated date for the FAQ.

Tip: To quickly search available resources for a keyword or set of words, use the search field at the top-right corner. This will yield results from both FAQ and Toolkit.